If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

"Aversives": A little something for the newer trainer.

In psychology, aversives are unpleasant stimuli that induce changes in behavior through punishment; by applying an aversive immediately following a behavior, the likelihood of the behavior occurring in the future is reduced. That is mostly true in dog training, but a significant exception is forcing, during which a behavior is made more likely to reoccur through the application of an aversive stimulus. Aversives can vary from being slightly unpleasant or irritating (such as a disliked color) to physically damaging (like a 2x4!). It is not the level of unpleasantness, but rather the effectiveness the unpleasant event has on changing behavior that defines the aversive. Aversive tools apply ‘unpleasant stimuli’.

The above description includes the word ‘punishment’. But that isn't specifically accurate in all dog training applications. I’m not going to launch into an Operant Conditioning discussion (yet). But what we’re really talking about here are aversive tools. Ear pinch, heeling sticks, e-collars, et al. They may punish, correct, or merely compel. But they do so by being used as implements that apply unpleasant stimuli (pressure/force).

I thought this might be a worthy discussion, what with hunting season coming up and all! I don't know about you, but I'm sharpening my dog up for hunting!

Evan

"Prepare your dog in such a manner that the work he is normally called upon to do under-whelms him, not overwhelms him." ~ Evan Graham“People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.”

That is mostly true in dog training, but a significant exception is forcing, during which a behavior is made more likely to reoccur through the application of an aversive stimulus.

Let's say for instance a dog pops on a blind, this statement tends me to believe that if you use force (collar stimuli) to drive the dog out of the pop that the popping is likely to occur again because you used aversive stimulus?

Or is the timing of the collar burn critical in that if you apply the burn after the dog has turned "back" towards the dead bird that the aversive stimulus would tend to have the dog repeat the turn and positive advancement to the blind in a future setup?

Aversive "training" or "conditioning" has both benefits and draw backs with the potential for an unintentional outcome or side effect. Positive reinforcement may take more time (repetition) and be less dramatic in results though you are less likely to see a down side to the positive reinforcement especially if it is randomized. From your treat training to teach a new behavior you are using positive reinforcement.

Each dog is different and regrettably too many of us have all our dogs fitting into our rigid program and time line. Please understand that the success rate of the good professionals and amateurs is that are flexible with a clear understanding of getting the basics in the dog before advancing onto the next step. Many clients who are paying the monthly training bills to the pro and many amateurs who trains their own dogs share a common short coming, they are impatient.

Yes, the aversive training is effective and as the original post suggested the level is on a continuum and needs to be so depending on the dog and the handlers understanding of the what dog has been taught and knows. What must always be for most in the trainers mind is what is the downside of the stimulus correction beyond the immediate aberrant behavior being worked on or trained out of the dog. So as Jerry Patopea would say think two steps ahead of your dog.

The aversive training if done judiciously will see have the dog respectful of you and working as a team player.

Good questions so far. The balance we seek should be determined by a couple important measurements. First, with the understanding that we use pressure (and therefore aversives) to change behavior. But we need to keep in mind that pressure isn't the first response to misbehavior. But even after we apply pressure to change a behavior we need to be consistent about praise/reward when the dog complies. Read your dog in the moment for his attitude and how he demonstrates an understanding of what you have required of him.

Originally Posted by Lucky Number Seven

Let's say for instance a dog pops on a blind, this statement tends me to believe that if you use force (collar stimuli) to drive the dog out of the pop that the popping is likely to occur again because you used aversive stimulus?

Thanks for asking. This is the kind of question I was hoping to bring out. Here's why that idea isn't specifically so.

Originally Posted by Evan

In psychology, aversives are unpleasant stimuli that induce changes in behavior through punishment; by applying an aversive immediately following a behavior, the likelihood of the behavior occurring in the future is reduced. That is mostly true in dog training, but a significant exception is forcing, during which a behavior is made more likely to reoccur through the application of an aversive stimulus.

So, when you de-pop ("Back"/nick - "Back") you are reducing the likelihood of future pops by making going, and continuing to go, more likely through forcing. It's not one dimensional. Again, by forcing the to go you achieve two goals together; to make it less likely that he will pop again because you have enforced the "Go" standard. So, what you've made more likely to happen in the future is that he will go, and not pop.

Originally Posted by Bartona500

Or is the timing of the collar burn critical in that if you apply the burn after the dog has turned "back" towards the dead bird that the aversive stimulus would tend to have the dog repeat the turn and positive advancement to the blind in a future setup?

Another good question. If you create that perception in your dog with this correction you have to strongly consider that your conditioning process was incorrect or incomplete. This is why I CC to specific commands in drills that isolate each function.

You're certainly right that timing is important, so you want to correct for popping as closely as you can to the occurrence. If I see his nose come past his ear as he turns to pop, I will try to correct in the midst of the pop. What I won't do is blow a 'sit' whistle and condone the pop - thinking he'll understand that he's been corrected for it. You will just have enforced 'sit', not 'go'. Am I making this clear?

Evan

"Prepare your dog in such a manner that the work he is normally called upon to do under-whelms him, not overwhelms him." ~ Evan Graham“People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.”

Your response is what I thought you meant by the correct meaning of your aversive stimulus statement but I just wanted to make sure that I understood it in the context of forcing on back, thus enforcing the "go" standard. Great topic!

Thanks Chad. Like any pursuit, retriever training has its own jargon. Sometimes a newer trainer may assume to understand commonly used terms, but they really don't...at least not yet. More and more, "aversive" shows up in training conversations, and it's good to have a handle on it so you can get more out of the discussion.

Evan

"Prepare your dog in such a manner that the work he is normally called upon to do under-whelms him, not overwhelms him." ~ Evan Graham“People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.”

"Prepare your dog in such a manner that the work he is normally called upon to do under-whelms him, not overwhelms him." ~ Evan Graham“People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.”